Who should/could be a Bond actor?

13293303323343351194

Comments

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Tom Hiddleston, who looks like he would be affraid of his own sneeze

    he he he

    "My name is Boond, Jaaa...aaatchooo!!!! Wh..what was that?!"
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Regarding Hemsworth, I can't picture him in the role. He's not too different from Chris Evans in form. There's too much dudeism about the guy. I can't picture him being that sophisticated rugged handsome hardman that Bond is and behaves like.
    I agree on the 'dudeism', but a lot of that is because he's generally been playing those kinds of roles (not the sharpest tools in the shed). If given the chance, I think he can do it. Like I said, I'm looking at him a little differently these days. I think he's finding his voice and peaking nicely. If they want a star for B26 rather than a dramatic actor, he's worth a look. Otherwise cast his film brother.

    From the below article:
    "I wouldn’t have picked Chris Hemsworth as Marvel's breakout comedy star when he was first cast as Thor, God of Thunder, but he turned out to be one of the best things about this never-ending mega-franchise. He’s tall, brawny and impossibly handsome, but there’s a self-mocking twinkle in his eye. When Thor is in gung-ho jock mode, Hemsworth’s wry machismo evokes the young Sean Connery as James Bond, raising an eyebrow at the corniness around him. "

    https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/thor-ragnarok-2017
  • Posts: 17,333
    Yep! But, he was hardly noticeable. He appeared in Utimatum during the Madrid sequence and got his arse kicked. Lol!

    He did look familiar. Can't say I've seen him in anything but Ultimatum.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Yep! But, he was hardly noticeable. He appeared in Utimatum during the Madrid sequence and got his arse kicked. Lol!

    He did look familiar. Can't say I've seen him in anything but Ultimatum.
    I'm a huge fan of Ultimatum and can't even remember him. I saw him recently in American Assassin however. Instantly forgettable there too, regrettably.
  • Posts: 17,333
    bondjames wrote: »
    Yep! But, he was hardly noticeable. He appeared in Utimatum during the Madrid sequence and got his arse kicked. Lol!

    He did look familiar. Can't say I've seen him in anything but Ultimatum.
    I'm a huge fan of Ultimatum and can't even remember him. I saw him recently in American Assassin however. Instantly forgettable there too, regrettably.

    Did he have a big role in that one?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Yep! But, he was hardly noticeable. He appeared in Utimatum during the Madrid sequence and got his arse kicked. Lol!

    He did look familiar. Can't say I've seen him in anything but Ultimatum.
    I'm a huge fan of Ultimatum and can't even remember him. I saw him recently in American Assassin however. Instantly forgettable there too, regrettably.

    Did he have a big role in that one?
    It was a bigger role than in Bourne. He was a named character. It's just that he failed to make an impression. Looks like too much of a brute too (imho). Better get Hardy if they lean in this direction.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Yep! But, he was hardly noticeable. He appeared in Utimatum during the Madrid sequence and got his arse kicked. Lol!

    He did look familiar. Can't say I've seen him in anything but Ultimatum.
    I'm a huge fan of Ultimatum and can't even remember him. I saw him recently in American Assassin however. Instantly forgettable there too, regrettably.

    Did he have a big role in that one?
    It was a bigger role than in Bourne. He was a named character. It's just that he failed to make an impression. Looks like too much of a brute too (imho). Better get Hardy if they lean in this direction.
    Criminally misused in American Assassin. He should've been Mitch Rapp rather than Dylan O'Brien who had zero resemblance to the book character. Watching these two acting their scenes out with Adkins given the part of an incompetent character, and knowing the guy I found the bit terribly unconvincing. Very terribly. Adkins is shunned by the unimportant parts and cheap roles he's given. The guy can pull off very easily if given a charismatic lead character.
    Yep! But, he was hardly noticeable. He appeared in Utimatum during the Madrid sequence and got his arse kicked. Lol!

    He did look familiar. Can't say I've seen him in anything but Ultimatum.
    Sadly he mostly appears in DTV movies. However, the film adaptation of the British comic book, Accident Man, might get a theatrical release, where Adkins stars as the titular character.
  • Posts: 17,333
    Might check out a few films with this Adkins if I find them. He looks very much like a villain type – almost Patrice-like. Speaking of Patrice: Ola Rapace is a really good actor. Such a shame he only had a small role.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,894
    Tom Hiddleston, who looks like he would be affraid of his own sneeze

    he he he

    "My name is Boond, Jaaa...aaatchooo!!!! Wh..what was that?!"

    He looks more suited to a slimy Alex Dimetrios type role. A sort of lower mid level villain, not tough enough to be top dog, but devious enough to have climbed a few rungs up the ladder.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    He would be a good Koskov.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Tom Hiddleston, who looks like he would be affraid of his own sneeze

    he he he

    "My name is Boond, Jaaa...aaatchooo!!!! Wh..what was that?!"

    He looks more suited to a slimy Alex Dimetrios type role. A sort of lower mid level villain, not tough enough to be top dog, but devious enough to have climbed a few rungs up the ladder.
    I couldn't disagree more with you. I think he's one of the best actors of his generation. Tremendously versatile and almost chameleon like. Bond would be a piece of cake for him.

    Having said that, you needn't worry though because I think he's built up a decent enough career trajectory that Bond will most likely hamper due to time commitments. As I said earlier, I'd much rather see him in other roles where he can flex his acting muscles. The same goes for Fassbender.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited November 2017 Posts: 5,131
    bondjames wrote: »
    Regarding Hemsworth, I can't picture him in the role. He's not too different from Chris Evans in form. There's too much dudeism about the guy. I can't picture him being that sophisticated rugged handsome hardman that Bond is and behaves like.
    I agree on the 'dudeism', but a lot of that is because he's generally been playing those kinds of roles (not the sharpest tools in the shed). If given the chance, I think he can do it. Like I said, I'm looking at him a little differently these days. I think he's finding his voice and peaking nicely. If they want a star for B26 rather than a dramatic actor, he's worth a look. Otherwise cast his film brother.

    From the below article:
    "I wouldn’t have picked Chris Hemsworth as Marvel's breakout comedy star when he was first cast as Thor, God of Thunder, but he turned out to be one of the best things about this never-ending mega-franchise. He’s tall, brawny and impossibly handsome, but there’s a self-mocking twinkle in his eye. When Thor is in gung-ho jock mode, Hemsworth’s wry machismo evokes the young Sean Connery as James Bond, raising an eyebrow at the corniness around him. "

    https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/thor-ragnarok-2017

    But is he really all that good an actor? I'm not so sure. Also, his movies haven't been very successful bar Thor.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    suavejmf wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Regarding Hemsworth, I can't picture him in the role. He's not too different from Chris Evans in form. There's too much dudeism about the guy. I can't picture him being that sophisticated rugged handsome hardman that Bond is and behaves like.
    I agree on the 'dudeism', but a lot of that is because he's generally been playing those kinds of roles (not the sharpest tools in the shed). If given the chance, I think he can do it. Like I said, I'm looking at him a little differently these days. I think he's finding his voice and peaking nicely. If they want a star for B26 rather than a dramatic actor, he's worth a look. Otherwise cast his film brother.

    From the below article:
    "I wouldn’t have picked Chris Hemsworth as Marvel's breakout comedy star when he was first cast as Thor, God of Thunder, but he turned out to be one of the best things about this never-ending mega-franchise. He’s tall, brawny and impossibly handsome, but there’s a self-mocking twinkle in his eye. When Thor is in gung-ho jock mode, Hemsworth’s wry machismo evokes the young Sean Connery as James Bond, raising an eyebrow at the corniness around him. "

    https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/thor-ragnarok-2017

    But is he really all that good an actor? I'm not so sure. Also, his movies haven't been very successful bar Thor.
    No, he's not a great actor. Serviceable, but as I said, seems to be peaking.

    Having said that, neither was Laz. We've got the best actor to play the part in the role right now, but is he the best Bond? That's the point. Ultimately Bond is very much about persona projection, attitude, style and overall demeanour. The incumbent has acknowledged that himself, during one of his interviews when he was in one of his moods.

    Hemsworth could work if they go in a certain direction, but not if they go in another.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I don't think he has the acting range for Bond,and his Aussie accent does slip quite a bit,even portaying Thor.
  • edited November 2017 Posts: 17,333
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I don't think he has the acting range for Bond,and his Aussie accent does slip quite a bit,even portaying Thor.

    Agree. Have seen this in a couple of other films/trailers as well.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Hemsworth would be too Brosnish.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Hemsworth would be too Brosnish.
    ...when nothing could be farther from the truth, Thundy.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,006
    It's interesting that during discussion of Hemsworth, he's been compared to both Brosnan and Craig. While I'm not sold, but I think he could, as could have Jackman, bring the light charm of Brosnan and the physicality of Craig. He's worth a screen-test.
  • edited November 2017 Posts: 17,333
    Difficult to place Hemsworth acting-wise if you ask me. Sort of an actor who can end up either as a 'Brosnish' or 'Craigish' type of Bond, if given the chance – and depending on the tone of the future Bond films.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Hemsworth doesn't have the edge. Sorry.

    While there are things people are concerned about regarding Hiddleston, sometimes I feel the remarks are rather unfair. Hiddleston, despite not being much of an "alpha male", has the edge and particularly the death stare. He can be charming and can also be very deadly and lethal when provoked. He gets my vote for Bond. Hemsworth is too much of a practitioner of dudeism. Much like Chris Evans. He doesn't have that Bond image for me. Hiddleston, however, does.

    D1l61YR.jpg
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Difficult to place Hemsworth acting-wise if you ask me. Sort of an actor who can end up either as a 'Brosnish' or 'Craigish' type of Bond, if given the chance – and depending on the tone of the future Bond films.
    I don't think he can pull off a Craig style except for his physicality. He is better suited to a lighter portrayal, as evidenced in Ragnarok. He has certain attributes that Craig does not have, and that makes him an interesting choice for slightly different take on the character while still retaining the 'macho superhero' attributes which they've injected over the past decade.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Hemsworth doesn't have the edge. Sorry.

    While there are things people are concerned about regarding Hiddleston, sometimes I feel the remarks are rather unfair. Hiddleston, despite not being much of an "alpha male", has the edge and particularly the death stare. He can be charming and can also be very deadly and lethal when provoked. He gets my vote for Bond. Hemsworth is too much of a practitioner of dudeism. Much like Chris Evans. He doesn't have that Bond image for me. Hiddleston, however, does.

    D1l61YR.jpg

    I agree with this...we've had enough of the 'brutish Bond' now,it's time to go back to the suave,thinking,spying Bond,which does fit Hiddleston's profile.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Nobody rocks a suit these days like Tom Hiddleston does. He has an 'old school' refined suave.

    That in combination with his acting skills makes him the right man for the job. I'm ambivalent though because I really like seeing him do other things.

    kzE5Ve0.jpg
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited November 2017 Posts: 8,006
    bondjames wrote: »
    Difficult to place Hemsworth acting-wise if you ask me. Sort of an actor who can end up either as a 'Brosnish' or 'Craigish' type of Bond, if given the chance – and depending on the tone of the future Bond films.
    I don't think he can pull off a Craig style except for his physicality. He is better suited to a lighter portrayal, as evidenced in Ragnarok. He has certain attributes that Craig does not have, and that makes him an interesting choice for slightly different take on the character while still retaining the 'macho superhero' attributes which they've injected over the past decade.

    This is what makes him an intriguing possibility; for some Craig is too "brutish", a brawler who struggles with the lighter side of the character. Brosnan, on the other hand was at ease with the lighter charming side of Bond but struggled to be convincing in the physical side of the role. Hemsworth can strike a balance.

    As far as Hiddleson, it boils down to personal preference and, while I can't quite put my finger on it, there's just something not right about him for Bond; in turn some would say the same for Hemsworth.

    What's interesting is that prior to being cast as Loki, Hiddleston first auditioned for the role of Thor. Once again the two could be vying for the same part.

  • Posts: 19,339
    This is the first time I have heard Hemsworth's name being banded about,i haven't even seen it mentioned in the tabloids compared to Hiddleston or Hardy.
  • edited November 2017 Posts: 19,339
    Thanks @talos !

    I will have a quick read of those now before I leave work to go home.

    EDIT : Upon reading these articles this grabbed my attention from the Daily Express :

    Clive Owen

    Another loser in the 2005 race, Owen had been the clear frontrunner.

    But the problem was he wanted gross profit points in every Bond film he appeared in.

    Eon wasn’t willing to compromise meaning Craig ended up with the part.


    Anyone know if this was true ?
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Hemsworth doesn't have the edge. Sorry.

    While there are things people are concerned about regarding Hiddleston, sometimes I feel the remarks are rather unfair. Hiddleston, despite not being much of an "alpha male", has the edge and particularly the death stare. He can be charming and can also be very deadly and lethal when provoked. He gets my vote for Bond. Hemsworth is too much of a practitioner of dudeism. Much like Chris Evans. He doesn't have that Bond image for me. Hiddleston, however, does.

    D1l61YR.jpg

    +1.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    bondjames wrote: »
    Nobody rocks a suit these days like Tom Hiddleston does. He has an 'old school' refined suave.

    That in combination with his acting skills makes him the right man for the job. I'm ambivalent though because I really like seeing him do other things.

    kzE5Ve0.jpg

    +1.
  • Posts: 17,333
    bondjames wrote: »
    Difficult to place Hemsworth acting-wise if you ask me. Sort of an actor who can end up either as a 'Brosnish' or 'Craigish' type of Bond, if given the chance – and depending on the tone of the future Bond films.
    I don't think he can pull off a Craig style except for his physicality. He is better suited to a lighter portrayal, as evidenced in Ragnarok. He has certain attributes that Craig does not have, and that makes him an interesting choice for slightly different take on the character while still retaining the 'macho superhero' attributes which they've injected over the past decade.

    Well, I don't know. He has a few drama roles too, which possibly gives something that's closer to a Craig than a Brosnan acting-wise. But I agree a lighter portrayal is more suitable, perhaps.

    Regarding Hiddleston, he sure has the acting ability and screen presence. Among few clear candidates he's one of the better, and possibly one that might attract the regular moviegoers based on name alone.
Sign In or Register to comment.